On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 09:41:39PM -0700, Maitland Vaughan-Turner wrote: If you just connect the dots, yes. But that's not how an analog waveform is reconstructed from PCM samples. 'Connecting the dots' is not even part of that process. You said the papers were incorrect. Then point out the errors. And indeed, a subjective evaluation is useless if not the result of a double blind test. If you have ever been involved in organising a controlled listening test you should know how easy it is to get completely invalid results and to fool yourself into believing things that are just an illusion. There is a point where more detail becomes irrelevant because it's way below the noise. For a properly dithered PCM signal it can be shown that the error that remains is in a strict mathematical sense indistinguishable from noise. Hence if it's below the analog noise floor it doeasn't matter any more. BUt you need at least _two_ bits for this to work. For 'detail in time' the situation is even simpler. If the waveform is bandlimited, then *every* detail is captured by sampling it at a rate equal to twice the bandwidth. Each sample does not only represent the waveform at the time it was taken, but in fact contains information about the entire waveform. The samples completely describe the waveform in the same strict sense as three points are sufficient to define a circle. It's not an approximation. -- FA Follie! Follie! Delirio vano è questo !